old55

You have to make 3 list vacancies even if you fill them with rookie upgrades. You have to lose a player to upgrade a rookie As I said, there is only 3 ways to make list vacancies 1. delist for nothing 2. trade for draft picks (includes lose a player to GWS for compensation picks) 3. trade for draft pick upgrades How hard is it to understand? A minuimum of 3 senior list players have to be off our list. It's a simple question - which 3 players are you going to lose and which of the 3 options above are you going to lose them for?

With 3 players you can't trade "like for like" - you actually have to make 3 vacancies on your list, that means either: 1. delist for nothing 2. trade for draft picks 3. trade for draft pick upgrades It's a simple question - which 3 players are you going to lose and which of the 3 options above are you going to lose them for?

You do realise we HAVE to lose 3 players off our list - it's an AFL rule. Which 3 would you lose and what for?

He said it's not unique for a club to lose a #1 draft pick soon after selecting him and used Jeff White as an example. He bull-sh1tted about how GWS don't have a big TPP advantage because altho they have $1M extra they have 55 players - however dopey Tim, Andy and Dermott failed to remind him that the vast majority of those players will be draftees on a mandatory $70K or less so there's a [censored]-load of money left over. He finally said that he hoped Scully stays at Melbourne but it's up to MFC to convince him to stay.

Yes that's right. AFL Player Rules I'm afraid it doesn't say anything about compo picks so it's not clear if our next pick was a compo pick whether that would be in the frame. It just says next draft selection so I'm assuming that it would be until advised otherwise. The point might be moot because one compo pick is AFTER our pick and the other is after the non-finals teams so they're likely to be close together anyway.

Pendlebury was drafted in 2005 - 2012 will be his 7th year. Restricted FA comes in at 8 years service.

You can't trade future draft picks even for GWS 17yos - I'm not sure where you got that idea - I'd love to see a source. We can trade the compo picks to GWS though and they have a 5 year life spab so are in effect "future" picks. The rule for F/S is that you have to give your next available pick after the nominating club's pick. F/S comes before the trade so we will have our regular 1st rounder. It's not clear whether compensation 1st rounders come into play but I suspect they do if you've nominated to use them in that year.

And apparently AFL players get paid too much?

It's a quote so I'm assuming it's verbatim. Your analysis is valid. But loose lips sink ships.

Interesting choice of words - I was kind of hoping it would be.

When they tag Scully, other including Beamer have a good chance to shine - with Scully out the heat is probably back on him.

You could ask Jaded - but I'd make sure your Life policy is up to date first. You'll just have to wait until Range Rover serves out his ban to find out.

Davey has to go back in there IMHO, it's a tough job - Davis and Yarran have opted out for HB roles. We need Strauss, Tapscott and hopefully Blease to come on as kickers in the back half.

Lauren Jackson?

The prosecution rests your honour.

You're special!

So you are saying we can win the flag in 2012 or 2013 and we should recruit Fevola. Or are you half-pregnant. Own an opinion man!

I prefer that Range Rover has come out and owned his opinion - I don't agree with it but it's his right to hold it and express it. What I don't like is insinuation and its associated lack of courage.

They may have come away hating each others guts - it's happened before and ol' Gubby has a reputation. Do you know for a "fact" that they're good mates? I think Aka and Leppa worked closely together at BL for a similar period.

The picks we would get for Scully would put us in a strong position in the auction. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/could-melbourne-end-up-the-big-winner-for-losing-tom-scully/story-e6frf9jf-1226096389389 That's what the article says and that's what I've agreed with.

Yes, a trade of a mid-1st rounder good for 5 years + Matthew Bate to GWS for Jaeger O'Meara or similar.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/118480/default.aspx Rendell says GWS wants players not draft picks in the 2011 draft - but maybe draft picks that are good in any of the next 5 drafts will be more attractive.

Yes but that is a huge IF - IF they want a particular player who has nominated for the mini draft - IF they get the clubs to disclose to GWS who they are going to take - IF they can find clubs to trade with who will not take that player You have a pathological inability to see the most likely outcome, the world according to H007: - Scully to Richmond not GWS - A player will fetch a higher trade price if he's uncontracted - and now ... GWS wont accept the best trade offer they can get for picks in the min-draft, they'll take something less from someone else who they hope wont pick the player they want

GWS doesn't have control over which players are in the mini-draft - for example O'Meara committed to the draft - whoever GWS give 1st pick to can take him. http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/giants-hold-the-key-for-young-bloods-20110705-1h0rp.html#ixzz1SPth9wNB